Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
This article presents a survey of research on childhood in antiquity and describes briefly the position of children in late antiquity and early Christianity.
Special attention is given to the relationship between childhood and gender,
with a focus on boyhood. The article analyses the apocryphal Infancy Gospel
of Thomas, which tells the childhood story of Jesus from age five to twelve.
This brief story, which consists of miracle stories and discourses, originated
in Greek in the 2nd century CE and became widely popular. The article shows
that its depiction of Jesus conforms to current ideas of gender, gender relations,
and gender socialisation. A central claim in the article is that boys were not expected to show the same degree of self-restraint as were adult males, but that
as children they were allowed to behave more emotionally and unpredictably.
Rather than being literarily inferior or theologically aberrant, the Infancy of
Gospel of Thomas in its depiction of Jesus gives a lively and credible glimpse
into the world and development of a late antiquity or early Christianity male
child on his way from boyhood to male adult life.
Keywords: boyhood, childhood, early Christianity, Jesus, theology, apocrypha,
infancy, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, gender
What was it like growing up as a boy almost two thousand years ago in the era of
Greco-Roman antiquity and early Christianity? What were the basic living conditions
for a young boy? What was his place and role in the family and society? What kind of
prospects would he have had for his future? What ideas were associated with boyhood
at that time?
There are, of course, no easy answers to these questions, and we are faced with a
number of challenges in trying to answer them. One problem is the limited number and
fragmentary character of the sources. Another is that they usually reflect elite settings.
It is also problematic to speak of one specific kind of childhood in antiquity, since chilReidar Aasgaard, University of Oslo.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Reidar Aasgaard, IFIKK, Faculty of
Humanities, University of Oslo, P.O.Box 1020, Blindern, NO-0315, Oslo, Norway. Electronic mail:
reidar.aasgaard@ifikk.uio.no
THYMOS: Journal of Boyhood Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1, Spring 2009, 3-20.
2009 by the Mens Studies Press, LLC. All rights reserved. http://www.mensstudies.com
thy.0301.3/$14.00 DOI: 10.3149/thy.0301.3 Url: http://dx.doi.org/10.3149/thy.0301.3
AASGAARD
drens lives would differ a great deal depending on the cultural and geographical setting. For example, growing up as a Jewish peasant boy in Palestine was quite different
from a boys life among the urban poor in Rome or in a fishermens village of coastal
Spain.
It is nonetheless possible to say some fairly representative things about what it
was like growing up as a boy in this period. In this article, I will survey central insights
produced by research during the two last decades using the early Christian apocryphal
Infancy Gospel of Thomas as my basic text.1
Children and Childhood in Research on Antiquity
During the last twenty years, research on ancient childhood has flourished. Aris
(1960) has served as impetus for much of this research. His book painted a dark picture: Children in antiquity were badly treated and only valued for what they were to become. Childhood was not really recognised as a life stage with its own distinctive
characteristics. As will be clear, subsequent research has distanced itself much from
this view and succeeded in painting a far more nuanced picture, although Aris still
has some sympathizers.2 Research of a more thorough kind than his commenced in the
mid-1980s. Much of this dealt with the Roman world, with a focus on family life. Rawson (1986, 1991) includes chapters dealing especially with children. Central aspects of
research were summarised by Dixon (1992). From the early 1990s the focus on children was gradually strengthened in studies by Bradley (1991), Saller (1994), Rawson
and Weaver (1994), and Eyben (1993). As early as 1989, Wiedemann had produced
the first full monograph on children in early Rome, with books by Rawson (2003) and
Laes (2006) being more recent scholarly studies.
Less research has been done on the Greek era concerning children, although important contributions have been made by Golden (1990) and Neils and Oakley (2003).
Studies of the Jewish milieu has been quite meagre, with a few exceptions, particularly Cohen (1993) on Jewish family life, Perdue (1997) and Tropper (2006).
Somewhat surprisingly, research on early Christianity was fairly slow in taking
up interest in children, although this has now changed significantly. An important early
contribution was by Mller (1992) on children in the New Testament. Another more
popular contribution was Strange (1996). Balla (2003) has given a good presentation
of childrens place in the family, with an emphasis on parent-child relations. A valuable
book representing the status quo on research on children in the Bible is Bunge, Fretheim
and Gaventa (Eds., 2008), which covers both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament. Studies dealing with children in the post-New Testament Christian tradition are
1
In Aasgaard (2009), I analyse this story in detail. The contibution contains the Greek text
and an English translation. See also Aasgaard (2006).
2
For a discussion and critique of Aris and a survey of the history of childhood, see Cunningham (2005).
AASGAARD
Children had to find their place within a hierarchical family structure, with the
head of the household having considerable power and childrens obedience being a
central value. Early research often had a very negative view of this hierarchy, seeing
fathers as exerting power in brutal ways. This picture has been significantly revised. In
fact, there were a number of limitations to parents authority, and parents usually were
very fond of their children (Saller, 1994).
Early research often accused adults and parents in antiquity of having little psychological insight into and sensitivity to childrens development, feelings and needs
(Chartrand-Burke, 2001, chs. 7-8). Closer scrutiny of material as diverse as the orator
Quintilian (35-100 CE), the apostle Paul (ca. 1/10-ca.64 CE), the bishop John Chrysostom (ca.347- ca. 407 CE), and burial inscriptions reveals that adults were very much
able to understand and identify with children, show them affection, and mourn at their
death (Aasgaard, 2007, 2009, ch. 6; Bunge, 2001; Rawson, 2003). To be sure, we find
many examples of negative evaluations of children. They were often seen as weak, unstable, irrational and unfinished. There are many examples of harsh treatment, and sexual and physical abuse. But we also find much that is quite in contrast to this picture.
Sources frequently depict children at leisure and at play, and parents as displaying much
leniency and humour about their offsprings whims and pranks.
Children could also be highly appreciated for their childish features. They were
often seen as sweet and were often cuddled. Childhood was regularly sentimentalised
as a period of purity and innocence. In some contexts, children could even serve as
mediators between the human and the divine worlds (Rawson, 2003, chs. 1, 6-7; Horn,
2005).
Obviously, being a child in antiquity was not easy. Everyday life was demanding
in many ways, but it was that way for human beings of all ages. Other marginalised
groups were also in a vulnerable position, whether they were women, slaves, the disabled, or the elderly. Within such a setting, children seem not to have been worse off
than most others.
What happened to children with the growth of Christianity in the first centuries
CE? Did the period bring about changes in their lives and in peoples attitudes towards
them? The matter is debated. It seems likely, however, that over time there came about
a new evaluation of childrens worth as human beings created in the image of God.
More restrictive views on abortion, infanticide and child exposure, and sexual relations
between children and adults came to be held. In school curricula, Biblical material
gradually supplanted classical material, which probably effected some change in ethical thinking and the formation of value judgments. Christianity also seems to have put
more emphasis on parents responsibility for their childrens upbringing and made
stricter demands on the children themselves regarding their conduct. In the context of
the new movement, both parents and children were to live up to high moral standards.
As Christians they had to prove to be good citizens (Aasgaard, 2006, pp. 35-36; Bakke,
2005, pp. 280-286).
AASGAARD
bution to research in this area. I aim to show that the Infancy Gospel of Thomas gives
us a plausible picture of what boyhood and attitudes to boyhood were like in the era of
Greco-Roman late antiquity and early Christianity.
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas
Briefly, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (IGT) tells the childhood story of Jesus from
age five to twelve.4 The story, which is about 6-7 pages long, consists mainly of alternating miracle stories and discourses. In the former, Jesus performs healing and natural miracles, about ten in number. In the discourses, he and other characters give short
speeches, most of which are related to Jesus being taken to school. The story ends with
a retelling of the New Testament story of Jesus as a twelve-year-old in the temple (Luke
2:41-52) (See the Appendix for an outline of the text.)
The author, time and provenance of IGT are unknown and have been matters of
much debate (Aasgaard, 2009, ch. 1; Chartrand-Burke, 2001, ch. 2). The text probably
originated in a Greek-speaking context in the middle of the second century CE. Although it has no value as a source on the life of the historical Jesus, it proved very popular and enjoyed wide circulation far into the medieval period. Within the later tradition,
it developed in different directions. The individual episodes were often reshaped and
sometimes combined in various ways. It was also translated into a number of languages,
including Syriac, Latin, Georgian, Ethiopic, Arabic, and Slavonic. On Irish soil, the
story was put into verse.5
The infancy gospel has not been studied very much. One reason for this is its very
complex textual history. Much scholarly energy (Chartrand-Burke, 2001; Gero, 1971;
Hock, 1995; Otero, 1967; Rosn, 1997; Voicu, 1998) has been expended to trace its
many variants in an attempt to establish an original text. In spite of the textual problems,
it is nonetheless possible to analyse the contents of the story more closely. ChartrandBurke (2001) serves as a basis for such an analysis. In the following, I take as my point
of departure the IGT manuscript which he considers to be closest to the original.6
Another important reason for the limited study of IGT is related to its contents,
especially its depiction of Jesus. On the one hand, he is described as a divine figure
equal to God in power and knowledge. For example, in addition to performing miracles, he proclaims to his father, Joseph, that when you were born, I existed and came
to you so that you, father, could be taught a teaching by me which no one else knows
AASGAARD
What notions are reflected in him concerning male qualities? To what degree is
maleness ascribed to him as a boy? Do any changes related to gender occur from his
early childhood as a five-year-old until he enters his next stage of life, as a twelveyear-old adolescent?
The story will be analysed from two complementary perspectives. First, the characterisation of Jesus and his social relations will be addressed. Here, I take as my point
of departure the masculine notions of dominance and self-restraint. I then divide the former into the more specific categories of strength, violence, persuasive speech, honour,
and female marginalisation. In this, I have adapted and adjusted some of the categories
of Clines (2003, pp. 181-182). Although these categories are somewhat anachronistic,
I find them useful primarily as heuristic tools. Second, I analyse the narrative as regards how gender socialisation takes place. Even though my analyses will be methodologically unassuming, they may nonetheless be sufficient in order to reveal basic ideas
about gender and boyhood in the IGT.
Jesus Character and Social Relations
I now turn to the characterisation of Jesus and his social relations. We will see that
many of antiquitys expectations about maleness are fulfilled in the Jesus figure.
First, the category of strength. Typical of Jesus in IGT is that he is described as
strong. Like the Jesus of the Gospel of John, he is portrayed as the one in charge, the
one to take control of what happens. He cannot be dominated (6:3, 7), he knows everything (6:6), and he has the power to do everything, even to waken people from the dead
(8:2; 9:3). When violated by others, he does not complain, but takes action and repays
offences. He curses children and teachers, and reprimands his own father (3:2; 4:2).
His strength is also evident in the emotions ascribed to him. When hit by his first
teacher, he becomes angry (6:8-9). He laughs at him and others (8:1) and has a severe
look (7:2). Although such emotions are far from the antique ideal (Gleason, 1995),
they emerge as very masculine in character. In her analysis of the Gospel of John,
Conway (2003) argues that emotional outbursts can be seen as signs of proper anger
on the part of a wise man (pp. 166-67, 173). The immoderate outbursts in IGT, however, are unlikely to have been those of such a proper kind.
One aim of strength is to prevent others from threatening ones personal integrity
or social position. The most manifest expression of such strength is violence. A striking characteristic of the IGT Jesus is his violent behaviour. When as a five-year-old he
is playing on a river ford, the son of Annas, the high priest, destroys the pools of water
he has made. As a result the boy is cursed so that he withers away (3:3). When a boy
running by bumps into Jesus, he suffers the same grim fate (4:1). When a teacher hits
his disobedient pupil on the head, he, too, is cursed to death (13:2). Thus, Jesus appears as violent, and to a degree that is manifestly inconsistent with the kind of offences carried out against him. Although the gravity of his reactions is problematic, the
point to note is that his behaviour emerges as distinctively masculine. For the more
tender souls among us, it is a consolation that he later on raises all the cursed persons
10
AASGAARD
sex relationships are minimised and female figures marginalised. Although Jesus in
IGT is not an adult but a boy, such patterns are largely reflected here. Indeed, the characters to whom Jesus relates throughout the story are almost exclusively male, at least
as far as can be judged from indications of gender in the text. All children singled out
are boys (3:1; 4:1; 9:3). Joseph, Jesus father, has a prominent role (2; 5-6; 11-14). The
teachers, who are all central characters, are male. Other figures, too, are male, such as
a Pharisee (2:3-5), the high priest (3:1), a rich man (12:1), and Jesus brother, James
(15). In fact, out of the fifteen individuals mentioned in IGT, fourteen are male. The
only exception to this male-dominated cast is Mary. She has a central position, to which
I return below. However, we should note that her role in IGT is more modest than in
the canonical gospels, notably Luke and John. Other female characters appear only
twice, namely, as mothers in parental couples (4:2; 9:2-4).
On one point, however, the Jesus of IGT deviates from ancient masculinity standards, namely in the boys limited self-restraint. He becomes vexed (6:8-9), seems to
be capricious and unreliable (6:7), and repays offences in ways dramatically out of proportion with their severity (3:3; 4:1; 13:2). Although this behaviour can be justified to
some extent as an expression of strength (see above), it nonetheless conflicts with ancient attitudes about moderation and predictability of conduct as masculine qualities.
The question is how this deviation can be accounted for. One explanation is that such
behaviour was acceptable for one particular group of males, namely young males, that
is, boys. As already noted, children (including boys) were regarded as unstable and irrational. Even though such features were often negatively valued, they were acknowledged as typical of children and as something to be indulgent about and even
understanding of (Aasgaard, 2009, ch. 6). Thus, what was not accepted in the case of
adult masculinity could be approved in boys. In fact, this can be seen as a central differentiating factor, a factor that made boys masculinity look different from that of their
adult counterparts. Interpreted this way, the Jesus of IGT emerges as a very true-to-life
figure.7
Jesus Age and Gender Socialisation
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas has often been held to be incoherent, a loose
stringing together of individual stories, and thus lacking a narrative nerve (ChartrandBurke, 2001, p. 262). Although it is true that the story is literarily not very advanced,
it has far more narrative sophistication and coherence than has been granted it (Aasgaard, 2009, ch. 3). For the current argument, however, it is not the literary merits of
IGT that are important but how gender is reflected within its plot. I shall concentrate
7
On similar differences between male youths and adults, see Harlow & Laurence (2002, pp.
69-71) and Laes & Strubbe (2008, ch. 8 and p. 199). For contrasting views of my interpretation,
see Hock (1995) and Chartrand-Burke (2001), who see in the IGT Jesus only an adult clothed in
a boys body.
12
On gender socialisation and the life cycle, see Rawson (2003, pp. 134-145). On general notions about age stages in childhood, see Wiedemann (1989, pp. 143-170) and Rawson (2003, pp.
134-145).
9
For a good presentation of the Roman educational system, see Rawson (2003, pp. 146-209).
10
For a description of childrens introduction into artisan work, see Wiedemann (1989, pp.
155-164).
13
AASGAARD
What takes place as Jesus grows older in IGT is gradual gender socialisation. From
being occupied with small boys activities, such as playing or performing simple household duties, up to the age of about seven he is led into the male adult sphere by going
to school and accompanying Joseph and other male family members to their male-gendered environment. Jesus develops from a less differentiated or female-coded state of
being to one that is markedly male-coded. The picture given clearly reflects what would
be common notions in late antiquity of gender relations and development.
Jesus Relations to His Parents
In IGT, Jesus parents emerge as the main dialogue partners in his process of maturation. Joseph is present as paterfamilias throughout the story. When Jesus is accused
of breaking Sabbath regulations and cursing a child to death, his father is made responsible for mediating between him and his opponents, defending him (2:3; 4:2), or
defending others against him (6:2-4; 7:4; 13:3; 14:3). Joseph is also the one to correct
and punish him (2:4; 5:1-2). In addition, he is the one who leads Jesus when they appear in public (4:1; even by hand, 6:8), at important turning points such as his first
school day (6:8; also 6:2-4) and at work on the field and in the workshop (11; 12). Finally, Joseph is present in the temple episode, though only in the periphery (17:1, 4).
Joseph, then, plays a prominent part as father. His role is, however, ambiguous. He
is depicted as occasionally uncomprehending and critical of Jesus, siding with opponents (2:4; 5:1-2; 6:3-4; 14:3) and seeing Jesus as falling short of him (for example, as
a carpenter, 12:1). But he also manages to see Jesus potential. He takes him to school
because of his wise way of thinking (13:1), and when witnessing one of his miracles,
he embraces and kisses him and exclaims: Blessed am I, since God gave me this boy
(12:2). Thus, Joseph is presented as a nuanced figure, able to express emotions, understand and misunderstand, and react in various ways. In short, he emerges as a very
lifelike figure. Probably, this is very much on a level with general notions of the character of the fathers role in late antiquity. A father was expected to display authority and
firmness, but also to be understanding and relate positively emotionally to his children
(Eyben, 1991, pp. 112-143).
Mary plays a far less visible part than Joseph. She appears only in the last half of
the story when she sends Jesus to fetch water (10:1). She is mentioned a second time
when Joseph commands her to confine Jesus to the house (13:3). In both cases, Mary
takes on the traditional female role within the private household sphere and is in a position inferior to her husband. Her final, and major, appearance in IGT is in the temple
episode. Here, her role goes beyond the expected, and she does what IGT elsewhere ascribes to Joseph; namely, she corrects Jesus and represents him in public (17:3-4).
Like Joseph, Mary is depicted as not fully understanding their son (10:2). Both
she and Joseph are concerned about Jesus well-being (10:2; 17:3). This concern is expressed in different ways, however, which reflect their respective gender roles. Whereas
Josephs perspective is that of the public spherehe is anxious lest Jesus cause harm
(14:2)Mary sees the matter from the private sphereshe is afraid that someone may
do him wrong (10:2).
14
AASGAARD
The infancy gospel is evidence of conventional ideas about masculinity in antiquity as presented in the research history surveyed at the beginning of this essay. At the
same time, the picture given is not of a single-track mans world. IGT is more nuanced
than that. First, there is in the story an awareness of the distinctive character of childhood as a phase. For example, Jesus and other children are given room for play by the
river, in the village, and even on a house roof. Tasks and obligations emerge only little
by little.
Second, there is in the story a sensitivity to processes of human maturing and social adaptation. This is very clear in the manner in which Jesus development is described. Both elements appear to reflect realistic glimpses into boys lives in late
antiquity.
Finally, IGT bears witness to an openness as to how the mans role was construed
in antiquity. This is visible in the description of the teachers, but even more so in the
characterisation of Joseph. He is far from being a stereotype of a man or of masculine
values. Rather, in his relation to Jesus he is depicted as a well-rounded character, who
moves within much of spectrum of the role available to a man at the time. He can be
stern and angry, tender and concerned, and even weak and bewildered. Thus, it can in
fact be argued that in some respects he falls short of the expected male standards and
puts himself to shame (Aasgaard, 2009, ch. 7).
A similar openness can be seen in the Jesus figure, although he very much lives up
to the ancient ideals of manliness. The only exception is that he does not appear to
show the self-restraint appropriate for a man. This can be accounted for, however, by
the fact that Jesus in IGT is portrayed as a boy. Although he possesses several adult
characteristics, such as wisdom and strength, he is in his activities and reactions depicted very much a true-to-life boy of his time. Whereas self-control was required from
adult men, it was not expected to the same degree of boys. In my opinion this is a major
insight to be gained from an analysis of IGT in relation to the study of boyhood, manhood and masculinity in the ancient world.
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas, then, gives us a picture of Jesus very much in accordance with what was likely to have been the life conditions and the process of maturing and gender adaptation for a boy in late antiquity and the early Christian era.
There should be little if anything in the story to surprise us. In fact, this is one of the
most important points that emerges from my analysis. Except for Jesus divine origin
and powers, there is nothing special, enigmatic or aberrant about him. He is quite simply portrayed as an ordinary boy of his time. The storys values are those of a male-centered culture. Jesus social context is that of a male-dominated world, and his boyhood
reflects the customary development of a male. From being a small boy belonging to a
less differentiated or female-coded sphere, with growing age and at appropriate times,
Jesus is gradually socialised into the adult male world. Step by step, from age five to
twelve, the boy Jesus makes it. He becomes a man.
References
Aasgaard, R. (2004). My beloved brothers and sisters! Christian siblingship in Paul. London/New York: T&T Clark Int./Continuum.
16
17
AASGAARD
Dixon, S. (1997). Conflict in the Roman family. In B. Rawson & P. Weaver, (Eds.), The Roman
family in Italy: Status, sentiment, space (pp. 149-167). Canberra/Oxford: Humanities Research Centre/Clarendon.
Eyben, E. (1991). Fathers and sons. In B. Rawson (Ed.), Marriage, divorce, and children in ancient Rome (pp. 114-143). Canberra/Oxford: Humanities Research Centre/Clarendon.
Eyben, E. (1993). Restless youth in ancient Rome. London/New York: Routledge.
George, M. (Ed.) (2005). The Roman family in the Empire: Rome, Italy, and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gero, S. (1971). The Infancy Gospel of Thomas: A study of the textual and literary problems.
Novum Testamentum, 13, 46-80
Gleason, M.W. (1995). Making men: Sophists and self-presentation in ancient Rome. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Golden, M. (1990). Children and childhood in classical Athens. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Grubbs, J.E. (2005). Parent-child conflict in the Roman family: The evidence of the code of Justinian. In M. George, (Ed.), The Roman family in the Empire: Rome, Italy, and beyond (pp.
93-128). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harlow, M. (2004). Clothes maketh the man: Power dressing and elite masculinity in the later
Roman world. In L. Brubaker & J.M.H. Smith (Eds.), Gender in the Early Medieval World:
East and West, 300-900 (pp. 44-69). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Harlow, M., & Laurence, R. (2002). Growing up and growing old in ancient Rome: A life course
approach. London/New York: Routledge.
Hock, R.F. (1995). The Infancy Gospels of James and Thomas. Santa Rosa, CA: Polebridge.
Horn, C.B. (2005). Childrens play as social ritual. In V. Burrus (Ed.), Late ancient Christianity:
A peoples history of Christianity (pp. 95-116). Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress.
Kuefler, M. (2001). The manly eunuch: Masculinity, gender ambiguity, and Christian ideology
in late antiquity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Laes, C. (2005). Child beating in Roman antiquity: Some reconsiderations. In K. Mustakallio, J.
Hanska, H.-L. Sainio, & V. Vuolanto (Eds.). Hoping for continuity: Childhood, education
and death in Antiquity and the Middle Ages (pp. 75-89). Rome: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae.
Laes, C. (2006). Kinderen bij de Romeinen: Zes eeuwen dagelijks leven [Children among the
Romans: Six centuries of daily life]. Leuven: Davidsfonds.
Laes, C. & Strubbe, J. (2008). Jeugd in het Romeinse Rijk: Jonge jaren, wilde haren? [Youth in
the Roman Empire: Years of Sturm und Drang?]. Leuven: Davidsfonds.
Larson, J. (2004). Pauls masculinity. Journal of Biblical Literature, 123, 85-97.
Levine, A.J., & Blickenstaff, M. (Eds.) (2001-). Feminist companion to the New Testament and
early Christian writings. London: Sheffield Academic Press.
Malina, B.C. (2001). The New Testament world: Insights from cultural anthropology. 3rd rev.
and exp. ed. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox.
McDonnell, M. (2006). Roman manliness: Virtus and the Roman Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McWilliam, J. (2001). Children among the dead: The influence of urban life on the commemoration of children on tombstone inscriptions. In S. Dixon (Ed.), Childhood, class and kin in
the Roman world (pp. 74-98). London/New York: Routledge.
Moore, S.D., & Anderson, J.C. (Eds.) (2003). New Testament masculinities, Semeia Studies, 45.
Atlanta, GA: SBL.
18
19
AASGAARD
Appendix
Outline of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas
1
2-3
4-5
6-8
10-12
13-14
15-16
17
Heading/Prologue
Three miracles
2:1 Cleaning of pools of water
2:2-5 Vivification of sparrows
3
Curse on Annas son
A miracle and the responses to it
4
Curse on careless boy
5
Joseph rebukes Jesus
Teacher discourse
6-8 First teacher
6 Dialogue
7 Lament
8 Exclamation
A miracle and the responses to it
9:1 Raising of Zeno
9:2-4 Parents dialogue with Jesus
Three miracles
10
Carrying water in cloak
11
Miraculously great harvest
12
Miraculous repair of bed
Teacher discourses
13
Second teacher
14
Third teacher
Two miracles
15
Healing of James snakebite
16
Healing of injured foot
Final discourse (epilogue)
17
Jesus in the temple
20